Senators under Fire: Explanations don't wash with readers

David Lassman/The Post-Standard STATE SEN. John DeFrancisco, R-Syracuse, talks with students at Roberts Elemen´tary School last month. The children happened to be touring the state Senate chamber in Albany June 8 when Republicans staged a coup.

Time for a clean sweep in poisoned state Senate

To the Editor:

Thank you for printing the letters from Sens. David Valesky and John DeFrancisco. Valesky tried his best to put a positive spin on a tragedy for democracy and an embarrassment for all New Yorkers. DeFrancisco's partisan rancor showed that he lacks statesmanship and collegiality to work in the Senate for the people of New York.

It is painfully clear by both their words and their actions that the political system in Albany has been poisoned. I believe power and the money of special interests have corrupted the political system in Albany to the point that we, the citizens of New York, are no longer important.

Although we may not think ill of our own senator, it must be clear by now that when mixed in with the others they are just as much to blame. Let's face it, not one sitting senator has exhibited the statesmanship that we citizens so desperately want from our elected officials -- the statesmanship to understand the gravity of the situation and to put self-interest and special interests aside.

We need a clean sweep of the Senate chamber in 2010.

Don Barber
Supervisor, town of Caroline
Tompkins CountyDon Barber ran unsuccessfully for the state Senate in 2008.

Senators diminish us and what remains of democracy

To the Editor:

Abraham Lincoln observed that, "Politicians are a set of men who have interests aside from the interests of the people and who, to say the most of them, are, taken as a mass, at least one long step removed from honest men." I thought of this while reading coverage of John DeFrancisco's damage-control exercise Tuesday at West Genesee High School.

The most telling comment was DeFrancisco's statement that "he would absolutely attempt the coup the same way." The arrogance of these public servants goes beyond either their merit or their place. They are public servants. They are not potentates, panjandrums or hereditary princes. They work for us. They serve us and not the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party.

When they abandoned their posts two months ago, they had no authority to do so. They certainly did not have the permission of their constituents, harmed by their actions. The people of the state of New York in the last election established what the balance of power would be in the Senate. These so-called public servants have neither authority nor place in American politics to usurp the voter's role -- certainly not by means of yet another rich guy and two less-than-honorable politicians from the New York City area. Evidently, Sen. DeFrancisco, it is kosher to use New York City-area politicians when it suits your purposes.

At the end of the day, this was not about reform, nor was it about control by the southern part of the state. Those were and are straw dogs. It was about positioning the Republicans to retake control of the Senate in the next election and to allow them control of the pork barrel that is the politicians' mainstay in repurchasing their seats year after year.

This was not about the unemployed, the sick, or any of the myriad issues that the state faces today. This was about the politicians and the politicians alone. For that one fact, they deserve to be fired. To DeFrancisco, David Valesky and all the other senators playing a fast game of spin the truth: When, at long, long last will you be gone? You diminish all of us, and what is left of our democracy, by your continued presence and your petty, childish, unending politicking.

Terrance Demas
Syracuse

Thanks for admitting you stalled on reform

To the Editor:

Thank you, Mr. DeFrancisco, for acknowledging the hypocrisy of your lack of pressuring for reform the last 17 years when you were in the majority, until the last six months, when you were in the minority. But you tried to justify your position by saying that it suited your constituents to not push for reform when you were in the majority. Since the majority wins, Mr. DeFrancisco, when do you think reform would suit your constituents, and how could it ever occur if all senators agreed with your position?

Please understand, Mr. DeFrancisco, I have no kind thoughts for Mr. Valesky, either. I think he was asleep at the switch and showed zero leadership during the entire stalemate. At this time, I agree with Andrew Hunter, who said at the meeting that "it is time for you and many like you to go." It's true that if we had a mass Senate "housecleaning" at the next election, we would get inexperienced leadership, but I think that, in this situation, "better the devil I don't know than the devil I do know."